Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Due to the interest in the AM Performance intake pipe, I've spoken to Andrew and we're now going to do a group buy.

You can see pictures of the intake pipe in the original thread: http://www.skylinesaustralia.com/forums/topic/414739-m35-am-performance-intake/

Build quality and workmanship is top notch. These really are impressive bits of gear.

They will bolt up to the stock turbo and stock airbox, or you can run a pod filter.

AM Performance now sell these online for $480. If we get 5 people, group buy price will be $400.

Delivery will be $20 Australia wide, $50 world wide, and will take 7-10 days.

Group buy will close Monday 17 December or when we have 5 people. I'd rather close early so we can get these sorted before Christmas.

This is a great price for a great product that I'll be dyno testing on Tuesday.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/415042-group-buy-am-performance-m35-intake/
Share on other sites

  • Replies 52
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

lolz.....at Dyno results!

Just add it $100 for every extra KW you get Ryan!

.....like most of them would know what they were looking at anyway. :P

So lets do this properly

So Ryan.

$1,500 - $2,000 for engine dyno hire(including jig)

$120 for oil change

$1,800 for motor in and out

$500 for engine wear and tear

$400 for every day Ryan is without his car

Add that to the frigg'n price.

PS. Roller dyno can be fudged!

New price for Suction pipe....$800 to cover cost of proper dyno results!

lol something like that Craig...

There won't be a 100% accurate figure for what you can gain with the intake. My tune is adding the F-con in, upping the boost and . So when I beat the 166kW I got last time, and hopefully get around what Theo got with his F-con (~210kW), I can't exactly say "Intake pipe gives you a 44kW power increase", because it's a flat out lie.

The intake pipe removes a restriction in the intake and flows better than stock. I think Scotty and Cam found that the intake pipe was required for over 250kW.

180kw lol.

thats where the stock suction stopped scott if im not mistaken.. but again, thats in the day when the dyno was in a different calibration.

hmm, I though it was just on 200 that the intake maxed out. Now that I think of it, all irrelevant as the dyno correction was changed 3 or 4 times along the way :wacko:

180kw lol.

thats where the stock suction stopped scott if im not mistaken.. but again, thats in the day when the dyno was in a different calibration.

Even better.

You buy intake now! :P

hmm, I though it was just on 200 that the intake maxed out. Now that I think of it, all irrelevant as the dyno correction was changed 3 or 4 times along the way :wacko:

It was either that or the dump, maybe 180 was the dump.. But yeh. Cal has been done plenty times over at his dyno lol

So this intake will max out the injectors on most cars with an exhaust and intercooler and standard ecu? I am guessing that it only maxes out the injectors at WOT? WHat does the intake do through the low and mid range of the engine, is there an improvement there or is really only for top end gains? I suppose I'm asking guys who have already done it, what has your experience been notwithstanding you have someone elses intake pipe.

its a little more responsive, a little louder with the stock ecu..

the gains are only really had from the tune itself. you will hit AFM cut in most cases, especially with scotts one, as its 3" minimum up to the turb.

its a little more responsive, a little louder with the stock ecu..

the gains are only really had from the tune itself. you will hit AFM cut in most cases, especially with scotts one, as its 3" minimum up to the turb.

There's no point in going 3" to the stock turbo though, as it only has a 2.5" intake on the front of it. It's TINY! With this design if you go high flow later on you can just get the bottom section modified for the larger turbo intake. Top is all 3" though.

You got 166awkw stock? Farrrrk....

lol. Wasn't stock. That was after full exhaust, AM Performance dump pipe, mid pipe with highflow cat and cat back. Only other mod was a Blitz panel.

Thats why I'd always suggest your first mod should be exhaust. Crazy gains to be had.

There's no point in going 3" to the stock turbo though, as it only has a 2.5" intake on the front of it. It's TINY! With this design if you go high flow later on you can just get the bottom section modified for the larger turbo intake. Top is all 3" though.

Yeh, obviously the 3" is making a difference with the 2.5" though if ones flowing enough to hit AFM cut with the stock turbo, and ones not.

I was just comparing to Scotty's one with the 3" all the way is all, it's the annoying problem I ran into lol

If this one avoids that, will be a good option for some of the mild modders here!

There's no point in going 3" to the stock turbo though, as it only has a 2.5" intake on the front of it. It's TINY! With this design if you go high flow later on you can just get the bottom section modified for the larger turbo intake. Top is all 3" though.

Of course there is a reason to keep it 3 inch to the turbo mouth, less restriction... I match my intakes to the actual hole made by the lathe (every highflow is different) in the front housing, and then tapering it out like a Garrett, a nice smooth funnel into the turbo. At the speed of sound, the airflow needs every little bit of help it can.

That said, how many of you are looking for every KW available? I should have done the same thing myself and compromised the lower intake for the benefit of lower cost, easy fitment and jigging, but as you would all know by now, I try and design my products for the best flow possible.

Hopefully Andrew does well with these, they haven't been a big seller for me over the years. Jump on the group buy guys. :)

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • Have a look at that (shitty) pic I posted. You can see AN -4 braided line coming to a -4 to 1/8 BSPT adapter, into a 1/8 BSPT T piece. The Haltech pressure sender is screwed into the long arm of the sender and factory sender (pre your pic) into the T side. You can also see the cable tie holding the whole contraption in place. Is it better than mounting the sender direct to your engine fitting......yes because it removes that vibration as the engine revs out 50 times every lap and that factory sender is pretty big. Is it necessary for you......well I've got no idea, I just don't like something important failing twice so over-engineer it to the moon!
    • Yup. You can get creative and make a sort of "bracket" with cable ties. Put 2 around the sender with a third passing underneath them strapped down against the sender. Then that third one is able to be passed through some hole at right angles to the orientation of the sender. Or some variation on the theme. Yes.... ummm, with caveats? I mean, the sender is BSP and you would likely have AN stuff on the hose, so yes, there would be the adapter you mention. But the block end will either be 1/8 NPT if that thread is still OK in there, or you can drill and tap it out to 1/4 BSP or NPT and use appropriate adapter there. As it stands, your mention of 1/8 BSPT male seems... wrong for the 1/8 NPT female it has to go into. The hose will be better, because even with the bush, the mass of the sender will be "hanging" off a hard threaded connection and will add some stress/strain to that. It might fail in the future. The hose eliminates almost all such risk - but adds in several more threaded connections to leak from! It really should be tapered, but it looks very long in that photo with no taper visible. If you have it in hand you should be able to see if it tapered or not. There technically is no possibility of a mechanical seal with a parallel male in a parallel female, so it is hard to believe that it is parallel male, but weirder things have happened. Maybe it's meant to seat on some surface when screwed in on the original installation? Anyway, at that thread size, parallel in parallel, with tape and goop, will seal just fine.
    • How do you propose I cable tie this: To something securely? Is it really just a case of finding a couple of holes and ziptying it there so it never goes flying or starts dangling around, more or less? Then run a 1/8 BSP Female to [hose adapter of choice?/AN?] and then the opposing fitting at the bush-into-oil-block end? being the hose-into-realistically likely a 1/8 BSPT male) Is this going to provide any real benefit over using a stainless/steel 1/4 to 1/8 BSPT reducing bush? I am making the assumption the OEM sender is BSPT not BSPP/BSP
    • I fashioned a ramp out of a couple of pieces of 140x35 lumber, to get the bumper up slightly, and then one of these is what I use
    • I wouldn't worry about dissimilar metal corrosion, should you just buy/make a steel replacement. There will be thread tape and sealant compound between the metals. The few little spots where they touch each other will be deep inside the joint, unable to get wet. And the alloy block is much much larger than a small steel fitting, so there is plenty of "sacrificial" capacity there. Any bush you put in there will be dissimilar anyway. Either steel or brass. Maybe stainless. All of them are different to the other parts in the chain. But what I said above still applies.
×
×
  • Create New...